Vivarium - Vol Xlii, No 2, 2004

8/9/2019 Vivarium - Vol Xlii, No 2, 2004

1/129

/';-=09 )(8*

=-0/']


2/129

VIVARIUM

AN

INTERNATIONAL

JOURNAL

FOR

THE

PHILOSOPHY

AND INTELLECTUAL LIFE OF THE MIDDLE AGES AND

RENAISSANCE

vivariums

devoted

n

particular

o he

rofane

ide fmediaeval

hilosophy

and he ntellectualife f heMiddle

ges

ndRenaissance.

EDITORS L.M. de

Rijk,

Leiden)

H.A.G.

Braakhuis,

Nijmegen)

C.H.

Kneepkens,

(Groningen)

W.J.

ourtenay,Madison)

E.P.

Bos,

Leiden)

D.

Perler,

(Basel)

M.G.M. an er

oel,

Nijmegen).

Secretary

f

he ditorialoard: rof. .H.

Kneepkens.

All

ommunications,

xcept

hose f business

ature,

hould

e addressed

toC.H.

Kneepkens,ijksuniversiteitroningen,

aculteiter

etteren,

akgroep

Mediaevistiek,

.O. Box

16,

700AS

Groningen,

he

Netherlands.

ADVISORY Tullio regory,Rome)Albertimmermann,Cologne)-J.E. urdoch,

COMMITTEE

(Cambridge,

A).

PUBLISHERS

Brill,eiden,

heNetherlands.

PUBLISHED

Twice

early.

SUBSCRIPTION olume LIII

2005)320

pp.):

UR

148

USD 185)

or

nstitutions,

nd

EUR

72

USD

90)

for

rivate

ubscribers,

nclusive

f ostage

nd

acking

Price

includesnline

ubscription.

Subscription

rders

re

accepted

or

omplete

olumes

nly,

rders

aking

effectithhe irstssue f

ny ear.

rders

ay

lso eenteredn n uto-

matic

ontinuing

asis. ancellations

ill

nly

e

accepted

f

hey

re eceived

beforectoberst f he

ear receding

he

ear

n

whichhe ancellation

is to ake ffect.laimsor

missing

ssues ill emet,reef

harge,

fmade

withinhree onthsf

dispatch

or

uropean

ustomersnd ivemonthsor

customersutside

urope.

Subscription

rdershoulde sent o:

Brill

cademicublishers

Strattonusiness

ark,

egasus

rive,

iggleswade

BedfordshireGI

8QB,

United

ingdom

Tel.:

44(0)1767

04954;

ax:

44(0)1767

01604

E-Mail:

rill@extenza-turpin

om

All

prices

nd

postage handlingharges

reexclusivefVAT

n

EU-countries

(VAT

not

pplicable

utsidehe

U).

Now

njoy

ree nline ccess

to this

ournal

with

our rintubscription.

isit heBrill-Website

at http:/ ww.brill.nlndenterhe nlineournalsection.

BRILL

LEIDEN BOSTON

ISSN

0042-7543

Printersion

;

ISSN 1568-5349

Online

ersion)

Printed

n

The Netherlands

Printedn acid-free

aper


3/129

Robert

rosseteste

n

IJght,

ruth nd

Experimentm

SIMON OLIVER

In

outlining

he

major

shifts

n

the

practice

of natural

philosophy

which

contributed o

the rise of

modern

cience,

one

might oint

to two

devel-

opments

s

being

of

particular

mportance:

he

increased

use of

experi-

ment,namely

the

contrived

observation of

nature

rather than mereAristotelian

mpdria'

nd the

wider

deployment

nd

increasing ophisti-

cation

of

mathematics.s it

possible

to find

ny

traces of such

practices

in

the

mediaeval

schools?1 t

has

been

argued

that

in

the work of two

Oxford

Franciscans,

obert

Grosseteste

c.

1170-1253)

and

Roger

Bacon

(c.

1220-c.

1292),

one finds

oth the

practice

f

experimental

bservation

(the

experimentm

r scientia

xperimentalis)

n

the

confirmation

nd

falsification

of

hypotheses,

nd the

more

ready

use

of

mathematical

nalysis.3

his

1Therelationshipetween ediaevalaturalhilosophyndmodernaturalcience

is

much

ontested.

ee,

for

xample,

.

Duhem,

e

Systme

u

Monde:

istoireses

octrines

cosmologiques

e

Platon

Copernic10

vols),

aris

913-1959.uhem

ocuses

articularly

n

the

ontinuity

etween ristotelian

cience

nd

early

modern

hysics.

or a

prcis

f

Duhem's

iew,

ee

his

ssay istoryf

hysics

n:P.

Duhem,

ed.

nd

rans. .

Ariewnd

P.

Barker),

ssays

n he

istory

nd

hilosophyf

cience

Indianapolis

996,

63-221.

f

hose

who

ontest

he

continuity

hesis',

prominent

xample

s A. Maier

ed.

nd

rans.

.

D.

Sargent),

n he

hreshold

f

xactcience:

elected

ritingsf

Anneliese

aier n atemedieval

at-

ural

hilosophy

Pennsylvania

982.

or

recent

iscussionf

many

ertinent

ssues,

ee

M.

J.

Osler

ed.), ethinking

he

cientific

evolution

Cambridge

000.

2

Although

rossetesteas

losely

ssociatedith

he

ranciscans,

ecoming

heir

irst

Lector

n

Oxford

round

230

n

the

years

efore

aking

he ee

of

Lincoln,

e

never

joined heOrder. acon ook hehabitround257. ee R. Southern,obertrosseteste:

The

rowth

f

n

English

indn

Medieval

urope

Oxford

986,

h. and

A.

Little,

ntroduction:

On

Roger

acon's

ife

nd

Works,

n:'

A. Little

ed.),

Roger

acon:

ssays

ontributed

y

arious

writersn

he

ommemoration

f

heeventh

enturyf

his irthOxford

914,

-32.

3

The

suggestion

hat

acon,

n

particular,

as he

ounderf

xperimental

cience

s

foundn

the

ommentsf

the

nineteenth

entury

athematician

nd

scientist

illiam

Whewell

howrotehat

Roger

acon's orksre

not

nly

o

far

eyond

is

ge

n

the

knowledge

hich

hey

ontain,

ut o

different

n

the

emper

f he

imes,

n

his sser-

tion

f he

upremacy

f

xperiment,

nd

n

his

ontemplation

f

he uture

rogress

f

knowledge,

hat

t

s

difficulto onceive

ow uch

characterould

henxist.'

W

Whewell,

History

f

he

nductive

cience

2

vols,

ewYork

858,

rd

d.,

ol.

1,

245).

t became om-

monplace

n

the

ater ineteenth

nd

arly

wentieth

enturieso

develop

his

ssessment

ofBaconwhich as tselferivedromhe raise iven yhisnamesakerancisacon,

a

writer

ho

was therwise

isparaging

bout

mediaevalatural

hilosophy.

or

particu-

Koninklijke

rill

V,

Leiden,

004

Vivarium

2,2

Also vailable

nline

www.brill.nl


4/129

152

SIMON LIVER

distinguishesheir pproachfrom he variousAristotelianismsf the later

middle

ges

and

suggests

hatmodernnatural cience

may

have identifiable

origins

prior

to the

Oxford Calculators or nominalists f the fourteenth

century,

nd

long

before

Kepler,

Galileo or Newton.

From

where does this

emphasis

on mathematics nd

the

experimentm

emerge?

t has

its

conceptual origins

n

the

Neoplatonic mage

of

light

as a

'formative

ower

and form' of nature

and

a

means of

knowledge

by

illumination.4 his

Hellenistictradition s the source of vivid

light

imagery

deployed throughout arly

mediaeval

Christian,

Muslim and

Jewish heology, orexample n the worksof St. Augustine, t. Basil, al-

Farabi,

Avicenna nd

Avicebron.5With

scriptural

recedent, ight

s asso-

ciated with the life of

God,

emanationfromdivine

being

in

the act of

creation nd the

form

of

truth.Given that Grosseteste nd Bacon were

steeped

n

this

tradition,

articularlyhrough

he worksof St.

Augustine

and the

mystical

heology

f the

Franciscans,6

t is

unsurprising

o

find

larly

nthusiastic

ppraisals

f

Roger

acon s

an

experimental

cientist,ee,

or

xample,

the ntroductionoRobertridges'ranslationfBacon's pus ajus: heOpus ajus f

Roger

acon

3

vols,

ondon

900;

.

Charles,

oger

acon:a

vie,

es

uvrages

ses octrines

Paris

861,

02

f.;

C.

Singer,

he ark

ges

nd he awnin:

F.

S. Marvin

ed.),

cience

and

Civilization

London

923,

39-43;

oseph upfer,

he ather

f

mpiricism:oger

ot

Francis

in:

Vivarium,

2

1974),

2-62;

.

Hackett,

oger

aconn cientia

xperimentalis,

in: dem

ed.), oger

acon

nd

he

ciencescommemorative

ssays

Leiden

997,

77-315.

or

the iew

hat acon s not

precursor

f

modern

xperimental

cience,

ee,

or

xample,

D.

Lindberg,oger

acon's

hilosophy

f

Nature:

Criticalditionwith

nglish

ranslation,

Introduction,

nd

Notes,

f

De

Multiplicationepecierum

ndDe

speculis

omburentibus,

Oxford

983,

iii

f. ndM.

Heidegger

trans.

.

Lovitt),

he

uestion

oncerning

echnolog))

and ther

ssays

NewYork

977,

22:

If,now,

oger

acon emands

he

xperimentm

andhe does emandt he

doesnotmean he

xperiment

f cience

s

research;

ather

hewants he rgumentumxre nsteadfthe rgumentumxverbothe arefulbservingf

things

hemselves,

.e. Aristotelian

mpeiria

instead

f

thediscussionfdoctrines.'acon

was

deeply

ndebtedo thework f

Grosseteste

hohas

himselfeenunderstoods a

forerunnerfmodern

xperimental

cience.his iew eceivestsmost ustainedefence

in

A.

C.

Crombie,

obertrossetestend he

riginsf xperimental

cience100-1700Oxford

1953. rombie's

hesis

as

proved

ontroversialnd s discussed

n

detail

elow.

orfur-

ther

omments,ee,

or

xample,

.

Koyr,

he

riginsf

Moderncience:

New

nterpretation

in:

Diogenes,

6

1956),

-22.

4

See,

or

xample,seudo-Dionysius,

e Divinis

ominibus

IV.697c

f.; lotinus,nneads,

1.6.3;

II.8.5

nd

11; V.3.11;

.5.7;VI.7.41,

t

assim.

5

See,

for

xample,

t.

Augustine,

e

TrinitateII.

,

IV.27,

VII. to

5,

VIII. and

3,

XII.

5;

St.

Basil,

exameronII.7

ff., I,

et

assim.

or detailed

escription

f

Augustine'suses f ightmagery,eeF.-J.honnard,a notione umiren hilosophieugustiniennein:

Recherches

ugustiniennes,

962,

24-75

ndR. A.

Markus,

ugustine:

easonnd

llumination

in:A. H.

Armstronged.),

he

ambridge

istoryf

ater

reeknd

arly

edieval

hilosophy

Cambridge970,

62-73.

6

On the

mportance

f

ight

n

Franciscan

piritual ysticism

nd ts

relationship

o


5/129

GROSSETESTE

N

LIGHT,

RUTH

ND

EXPERIMENTM

153

light

as

a

central and

unifying

heme

in

their

writings

n natural

phi-

losophy,metaphysics

nd

theology.7

n

emphasis

n the nature nd mean-

ing

of

light forges

a

bond

between

observation,

natural

philosophy,

mathematics,

etaphysics

nd

theology

or number f reasons.

nitially,

four f thesemerit

articular

mention.

irst,

ight

was

implicated

n

many

of the most

fascinating

nd

mysterious

atural

phenomena:

the

rainbow,

the halo

surrounding

he

atmosphere

nd

light'spresence

n

the uncor-

rupted

and

perfectly

moving

celestial bodies.

Secondly,

t is

light

tself

which

s

the

formof truth nd which makes

all

things

oth visible

and

knowable.8 hus observation,he experimentmis intimatelyinkedto the

attainment f truth

hrough

he mediation f

ight,

oth

spiritual

nd

vis-

ible.

Thirdly, hrough long

tradition f

investigation

nto the behaviour

of

ight perspectiva

,

exemplified

n

the works f Euclid and

Ptolemy's

rea-

tiseson

optics,

t was knownthatvisible

ight

cts

according

o the strict

patterns

f

a

yet

more real and abstractmathematical

eometry.

n

true

Platonic

fashion,

mathematics ould then mediate between the

Supreme

Light

or

Highest

Truth,

nd the weaker

ight

reflected

n

created nature

which s nevertheless

n

emanation rom

hat

Highest

Truth.At the

begin-

ningof his treatise e LineisAngulis,tFiguris, rossetestewrites much

quoted

exhortationo the use of mathematics

n

natural

philosophy:

The

usefulness f

considering

ines,

angles

and

figures

s the

greatest,

ecause

it

is

impossible

o understand atural

philosophy

without hese. 9

inally,

and

perhaps

most

mportantly,

he Christian

criptures

escribe God as

light,

nd Christ

as

the

light

of the world.10 n these

grounds

writers

later atural

hilosophy,

ee

R. FrenchndA.

Cunningham,

efore

cience:henvention

f

the riars'aturalhilosophyAldershot996, hs9 and10.

7

For

general

verview

f

ight

nd ts elationo

metaphysics,

ee

D. C.

Lindberg,

The

Genesis

fKepler'sheoryf ight:ight

etaphysics

rom

lotinusnd

epler

in:Osiris

nd

series

1986),

-42.

8

Robert

rosseteste,

e Ventate137: Veritas

gitur

tiam reata stendit

d,

uod

st,

sednon

n

suo

umine,

ed

n uce eritatis

ummae,

icut olor

stendit

orpus,

ednon

nisi

n

uce

uperfusa.

Similiter

otentia

st ucis ummae

eritatis,

uae

sic llustrt

veritatem

reatam,

uod psa

tiamllustratastenditem eram. rosseteste's

wenty-

seven

hilosophical

orks,

ncluding

e VentatendDe Luceare vailable

n

Die

philosophi-

schen erkeesRobert

rosseteste,

ischofs

on incolned. L.

Baur,

Mnster.

W.,

1912

(available

t

http://www.grosseteste.com/).

n

referenceso De Luce ndDe VentateI fol-

low he aginationfBaur's atin ext.9Grosseteste,eLineis,ngulistFiguris,9-60,d. Baurn.8 above):Utilitason-

siderations

inearum,

ngulorum

t

figurarum

st

maxima,

uoniammpossibile

st ciri

naturalem

hilosophiam

ine llis.

10

or

xample,

enesis

;

saiah

0.19;

ohn

.1-18,

.12

nd

.5;

Acts

2.

f.;

Timothy

6.16;

1

John

.5;

Revelation

1.23;

Revelation

2.5.


6/129

154

SIMON

LIVER

such as the

Pseudo-Dionysius

nderstoodGod to be

the uncreated

Light,and visible

ight

o be God in action.11 or

Grosseteste,

nd

later

Bacon,

to

study ight

was to

study

God and all

things

n

relation o

God.

Focussing articularly

n

the

thought

f

Robert

Grosseteste nd

begin-

ning

with a

brief

xposition

f

his

treatises e

Luce and De

Ventatethis

article

eeksto

place

the

experimentm

nd

use of

mathematics

n

the

wider

contextof his

understanding

f

truth nd

illumination. s

mathematics

merely

convenient

anguage

which

encapsulates

he

natural? will

sug-

gest

that

mathematics,

or

Grosseteste,

raws

together

atural

philosophy

and metaphysics ithin Platonicframework fparticipationn such a

way

that the

fluctuationsnd

vagaries

of natureare

not

confined

wholly

within

he stricturesf

mathematical

ormulae.

Why

was

the

experimentm

namely

he observation f the

motions f

nature,

uggested

o

Grosseteste?

Against

Alistair

Crombie,

the most

vigorous

defender f the

view that

Grosseteste's

hought

nticipates

modern

xperimental

cience,

will

argue

that

the

practice

of

experimental

bservation s not

introduced nto

nat-

ural

philosophy

o

mitigate

n

inductive

cepticism.

nstead,

it will

be

seen

that,

for

Grosseteste,

herecould never

be

a

'problem

of induction'

as therewas fortheearlymodern cientists.12ecause of hisNeoplatonic

understanding

f

truth

n

which all

things

re

ultimately

lluminated

n

the

eternal

ight

of the

Trinity,

here s

no

dark,

unilluminated

ogical

gap

between the

observation f

singulars

nd the

postulation

f

univer-

sal

first

rinciples

f

naturewhich

mustbe

traversed

y

a

baseless

nduc-

tive intuition.

Rather,

for

Grosseteste,

he

experimentm

s

of

theological

importance:

t

may help

us

to

assuage

the

effects f the Fall

on human

knowledge. rucially,

t will

be seen that divine

lluminations

not some-

thing

dded to the kind of

inductive

easoning

ssociated with

the

sys-

tematic,experimental bservationof nature; rather,both belong to a

single,

divine

guarantee

of

truth.Whereas our

contemporary

iscussions

of science and

religion

eek to

reconcile

pparently

onflicting

uthorities

11

ee

Pseudo-Dionysius,

he ivine

ames

693b f.

12

he

problem

f

nduction',

lassically

tated

y

DavidHume

see

his

nquiryoncerning

Human

nderstandings

V.

),

oncernshe

egitimacy

f he nferencef

universaisrom

ar-

ticulars.or

xample,

s t

rationalo nferrom

single

bservationhat

causes

,

that

this

s

universally

he

ase,

articularly

iven

hat,

s Hume

tated,

ne

only

bserveshe

conjunction

f

ventsndnot ctual ausal

rocesses?oreover,

s t

rationalo assumethat ature ill ehaventhe amewaynthe utures thas nthe ast?cienceppears

to assume

n

affirmativensweroboth

uestions.

he

practice

f

he

onstantlyepeat-

able

xperiment,

n

which

articular

nstancesf

ausal onnectionsre

bservedver nd

over,

eems o be an

attempt

o

assuage

n

apparentporia.

he

problem

f nduction

will e discussed

urther

elow,

p.

XXX.


7/129

GROSSETESTE

N

LIGHT,

RUTH ND

EXPERIMENTM 155

and epistemologies religion s founded n narrative,radition nd com-

munally

uthoritative

exts,

whereas

cience s

founded n

supposed

obser-

vational

factsand

syllogistic

eduction

in

the work of

Grosseteste ne

findsnatural

philosophy

nd

theology ying

under a

single,

ranscendent

truth.

inally,

will

suggest

hat Grosseteste's

hought

emains

nterest-

ing

not because he is a

proto-modern

xperimental

cientist,

ut

for

a

much more

suggestive

eason:

he offers view of

the sciencesas

distinct

but

unified

n

their

articipation

n

the one

divine nd

transcendent

ight.

I

begin,

however,

with

the broader and

crucial context

of

Grosseteste's

thought, amelyhis cosmogony f light.

A

CosmogonyfLight

How does

Grosseteste

nderstand he

nature of

light,

nd

what

is

light's

place

in

his

cosmogony?

The first

orporeal

form ,

writes

Grosseteste t

the

very

beginning

f his

treatise e

Luce^

which some call

corporeity

s

in

my opinion

light. 13

f its

own

accord,

light spreads

itself

nstantly

from

singlepoint

n

every

direction

unless

obstructed)

nd

so forms

sphere.Light s dynamic nd possesses n instantaneouself-motionnd

self-propagation.14

ontinuing

with a

consideration f the nature

of cor-

poreity

nd

matter,

Grosseteste

resents

wo

propositions:

orporeity

s

that

which

necessarily

ccompanies

the

extensionof

matter nto

three

dimensions,

et

in

themselves

atter nd

corporeity

re

simple

substances

lacking

dimension.

However,

a

consideration f matter n

its own could

only

be

conceptual:

t cannot

be

separate

from

form,

nd

the formof

matterwe

observe

n

the

universe s diffusion

nto three

dimensions.

hat

which,

of its

own

accord,

diffusestself

n

thisfashion s

light.

Therefore,

concludesGrosseteste,

ight

s thefirst

odily

form,whichsome call cor-

poreity;

t

necessarily

ccompanies

and enables

the diffusion f

matter

into

three

dimensions.15

ecause

it

is the

first

odily

form,

ight

s

there-

fore he most

noble and

comparable

to

formswhich

exist

eparately

uch

13

Grosseteste,

e Luce

51: Formam

rimam

orporalem,

uam uidam

orporeitatem

vocant,

ucem

sse rbitror.

arking

he

mportance

f

Grosseteste'se

Luce

McEvoy

comments

hat hisworks

oneofthe ew

cientific

osmologies,

nd

perhaps

he

nly

scientificosmogony,rittenetweenheTimaeusnd modernimes.'J.McEvoy,he

Philosophyf

RobertrossetesteOxford

982, 51).

14

his s

not,

ccording

o

Grosseteste,

local

motion,

or

f

t

werewe would

er-

ceive

lluminationo

occur

n

stages.

ee

Grosseteste,

exameronII.10.1.

15

ee

Grosseteste,

e

Luce

52:

Lux

rgo,

uae

est

rima

orman

materia

rima

re-

ata,

eipsamer

eipsam

ndique

nfinities

ultiplicans

t n

omnem

artem

equaliter


8/129

156

SIMON LIVER

as intelligences.Within he cosmologicalhierarchy,ight s the first or-

poreal

form tands at

the

hinge

between

the

physical

nd

separate

sub-

stances,

haring

more

intensely

n

the

nobility

nd

greater

being

of

the

higher

realms.

Through

the

mediation f

light

s

its first

orm,

matter s

thereby

xalted to share

in

a

greater

being.

Having

outlined he

primacy

nd

excellence f

ight,

Grosseteste

eploys

the mathematics f

relative nfinities

o

explain

the finite

xtension f

the

universe

from

a

simple point.

How could a

finite

orporeal

universe

emerge

from

simplepoint

acking

dimension,

amely

he

point

of

ight?

Referringo the authorityfAristotle, rossetestetates hat the quan-

tity'

f the

cosmos could not

be the result

f

a

merely

inite

multiplica-

tion

of

a

simple thing

uch as

light

because the ratio

etween

omething

simple

and

something

inite s

itself nfinite.16

herefore,

ecause a

finite

thing

xceeds a

simplething nfinitely,

he

primordial ight

mustbe mul-

tiplied

n

infinity

f times

n

order to

extendmatter

nd

produce

a

finite

corporeal

universe.

However,

does this

mean that he

cosmos

will

be one

spatially

omoge-

nous and

undifferentiatedass?

No,

because the

infinities

y

which

ight

is multipliedmay vary.For example,Grosseteste tatesthatthe sum of

all

numbers s

infinite nd

yet

s

greater

han

the sum of all

even num-

bers even

though

his

atter s also

infinite.

mportantly,

here an be

pro-

portions

between infinities: he sum

of

numbers

doubled from one to

infinity

s an

infinite,

s is the

sum of

half

of all

these

doubled

numbers,

yet

the sum of these halves

must of

necessity

e half

the sum of

their

doubles. 17

From these

propositions

oncerning

he mathematical

roportions

f

various

nfinities,

rosseteste laims

that

ight

xtendsmatter nto

argeror smallerdimensions

ccording

o the

proportionate

nfinities

y

which

it is

multiplied,

porrigens,

ateriam,

uamrelinquere

on

potuit,

ecum istrahens

n

tantam

olem,

quanta

st

mundi

achina,

n

principioemporis

xtendebat.

16

t

s not lear o which f

Aristotle'sexts rosseteste

s

referring.cEvoy

uggests

De Celo

I.5.271bl5

f.

McEvoy

982

n. 13),152).

17

Grosseteste,

eLuce53:

Quorum

ubduplorum

ggregationem

ecessest sse

ubdu-

plam d aggregationemuplorumuorum. rosseteste'sinal ropositionelatingoinfinitiess that he nfiniteum f lldoubled umberss not elated

y

rational

ro-

portion

o he nfiniteum f

orresponding

alves rom hich

asbeen ubtracted

finite

number

for

xample,

).

The

proportion

hich

emains

ill

nly

e

expressible

s

an

irrationalumber.


9/129

GROSSETESTE

N

LIGHT,

RUTH ND

EXPERIMENTM

157

for

f

ighthrough

he

nfinite

ultiplication

f

tself

xtends atter

nto dimen-

sion f wo ubits,y hedoublingf his amenfiniteultiplicationtextendst

into

dimensionf

four ubits 18

Thus

the

extension f matter n

increasing parsity

hrough

he

universe

is

explainedby

the

mathematics f

different

nfinities

y

which the

point

of

primordial

ightmay

propagate

tself.

It is

possible

to see

in

this

section of De

Luce a

Platonic

understand-

ing

of

mathematics.

Grosse este

begins

with a

primordial

ight

which is

wholly

ingle

and one.

Considered

mathematically,

nity

or

the one is

not the first umber,but the principleof all number.Multipleentities

participate

n

unity,

or

they

re

multiplications

f a

unity

which s

their

conceptual

and

ontological

basis.

In

an

analogous

fashion,

ight,

s

the

first

odily

form,

s not

merely

he first

ody:

it is the

basis,

conceptual

and

ontological,

f all

material

extension.This

material

extension

nto

multiple

proportions

articipates

n

the

single

unity

of

the first

odily

form

which

s

light.

This is to

say

that the

advent

of the

materialrealm

which s

Grosseteste's

ubject

matter

n

De

Luce s a

participation

n

the

mathematics f

the one and

the

many,

where

mathematics

orms

medi-

atorybridgebetweenmetaphysics, hich is concerned withthe higher

being

of

unchanging implicity

into

which

would fall

lux),

and

physics

which s

concernedwith

the

multiplicity

f

differentiated,

omplex,

mov-

ing

beings

n

the

cosmos

into

which

would fall

umeri).

he one and

the

many,

ux

nd lumen

are not

n

dualistic

pposition:

he

atter

articipates

in

the

former.19

Having

outlined

n

more detail a

cosmogony

f

light,

describing

he

hierarchical

tructuref

the

heavens,

he

formationf

the

elements

hrough

the

various

rarefactions f

matter nd

deriving

he

different

otionsof

18

bid.:Si enim

ux

multiplicatione

ui nfinita

xtendit

ateriam

n

dimensionem

icu-

bitam,

adem

nfinita

ultiplicatione

uplicata

xtendit

arn n

dimensionem

etracu-

bitam

As an

aside,

Grosseteste

emarkshat

his

rinciple

aswell

knowno

both

Atomistsnd

Platonists.he

former

nderstoodll

things

o

be

composed

f tomic

nits,

while

he atter

elievedll

things

o be

composed

f

urfaces,

ines nd

points.

19

ee

Plato,

epublic

524a

ff.

rosseteste'sine

f

hought ay

ave

nteresting

rigins

in

Pythagorean

cience. fthe

ythagoreans,

acob

lein

omments

hat,

We

may

on-

jecture

hat

heyPythagoreans]

aw

he

genesis

f he

worlds a

progressive

artitioning

ofthe irstwhole' neaboutwhoseriginsheyhemselves,tseems, ere ot bletosay

nything

onclusive Thisfirstone', s well s the

ubsequent

ones'which ere

the

esultf

partition,

.e.,

he

numbers'

hemselves,

hey

herefore

egarded

s

having

bodily

xtension. .' in:

Greek

athematical

hought

nd

he

Originf

Algebra

Cambridge,

Massachusetts

968,

7.


10/129

158

SIMON LIVER

the cosmos,Grosseteste oncludes his treatiseby adducingthe unityof

the cosmos

through

ertain

mathematical

roportions.

hese

are,

once

again,

characteristically

latonicand reminiscentf the

cosmology

f the

Timaeus. he

highest

ody

containsfourconstituent

arts:

form,matter,

composition

nd the

composite.

n

other

words,

the

form,

eing totally

simple

nd devoid

of

composition,

s

akin

to mathematical

nity.By

con-

trast o this

fundamental

nity,

matter onstitutes he

dyad

on

account

of

a two-fold

otency: receptivity

o

impressions

eceivedfromwithout

and

divisibility.

owever,

there

s also

composition,

his

being

akin

to the

numberthree,for n compositionwe find nformedmatter,materialized

form and the order between

these two.

Finally,

the

quaternary

s

the

composite

roper,

over

and above these three onstituents.20he cosmos

thereforeonstitutes

unity

ecause it

possesses

ll these

principles

which

together

re sufficient

nd

necessary

or

completeness:

something

corresponding

oformnd

unity,

nd

omethingorresponding

omat-

ter nd

duality,omethingorresponding

o

composition

nd

trinity,

nd

omething

corresponding

o the

omposite

nd

quaternity.21

There is a fundamentalnity

n

the

multiplicity

f

being

within he cos-

mos,

seen most

particularly

n

the

multiplicity

f motions

which

emerge

from he

simple

ircular

motionof the first eaven.

Moreover,

his

whole

is

one

of five harmonious

proportions

ound

n

the

first our numbers

(the

numbers hemselves

lus

the whole which

they

onstitute),

hese

pro-

ducing

harmony

n

musical

melodies,

n

bodily

movements,

nd

in

rhyth-

mic measures. 22

Thus

Grosseteste

s

able

to formulate

cosmogony

ased on

light

with

mathematics

roviding

not

ust

a

conceptualhinge

between

metaphysics

and cosmology, ut also the ontologicalmediationbetween the simple,

motionless

ingularity

f the

first

odily

form nd the

movingmultiplic-

ity

of

an

extended,

material

reation.Mathematics

s more than a con-

venient

anguage

for

describing

he

cosmos,

because number s

integral

to the

being

of the

materially

xtended,

moving

nd

harmonically

nified

creation.

20

Grosseteste,eLuce58.21 bid.: Ex his

patet, uod

denariusitnumerusniversitatiserfectus,uiaomne

totum

t

perfectum

liquid

abet

n

se sicut

ormamt

unitatem,

t

aliquid

icutmate-

riam t

binarium,

t

aliquid

icut

ompositionem

t

ternarium,

t

aliquid

icut

omposi-

tum

t

quaternarium.

22

bid.:

.

in

musicis

odulationibus,

esticulationibus

t

rythmicisemponbus.


11/129

GROSSETESTEN

LIGHT,

RUTH ND

EXPERIMENTM

159

It is clear from therwritings,owever, hatforGrossetesteightdoes

not

merely

relate to the first

orporeal

formor to visible

ight

n

cre-

ation,

but

supremely

o God himself.

n

his Hexamerona

meditation n

the six

days

of

creation,

Grosseteste elates

ightanalogically

o the life

of the

Trinity

n a

fashionreminiscent f the

Neoplatonic

emanationist

doctrine f creation.He writes

hat,

From he act hat od s

a

Trinity

f

persons,

tfollowshat od s

ight:

ot

od-

ily

ight

ut

non-bodily

ight.

r rather

beyond

ither.

veryight

as

by

nature

and essencehis

haracteristic,

hat t

begets

plendour

rom

tself.

he

ight

hat

begetsnd he plendourhatsbegottenecessarilyre ockedn mutualmbrace,andbreatheut heir utual armth.23

Thus his

cosmology

nd

cosmogony

re linkedwith the doctrine f

God

through nalogical participation

n

the

supreme ight

of the

Trinity.

However,

s

Grosseteste

s

deployment

f

light

n

describing

he life of

God and the formation nd motionsof the cosmos

merely

convenient

metaphor?

r is

light

he basis of

a

wider

metaphysics

hichalso

encom-

passes

a

theological nderstanding

f truth nd science?To answer

these

questions,

turn

nitially

o the treatiseDe Ventate

before

considering

Grossetestes commentaryn Aristotle'sosteriornalyticsnd hisadvocacy

of

the

experimentm.

Light

nd Truth

Grosseteste

egins

De Ventate

ithno less than seven

arguments

n

favour

of the

proposition

hat there s

a

truthother than

the

supreme

truth.

Having

adduced five

rguments

o the

contrary,

e marshals he author-

ity

of St.

Augustine

n

postulating

hat

everything

hich s

known to be

true s observed o be true n the

light

of the

supreme

ruth.24

owever,

does the

light

of this

supreme

ruth bliterate

ll

other

truth,

ust

as

the

light

f the sun is able

to

wipe

out the

power

of

other lluminaries?

ust

23

R.

Grosseteste,

exameron

VIII.3.1,

d. R.

C. Dale and S.

Gieben,

ondon

982,

220,

1-6:

Quod

utem eus it

n

personis

rinus,

nde

equitur

uod

Deus

st

ux,

on

corporea

ed

ncorporea;

mmo

agis

eque orporeaeque

ncorporea,

ed

upra trumque.

Omnis utemuxhochabet aturalitertessencialiteruoddegignituumplendorem.Lux utem

ignens

t

splendorenitus

ecessarioese

mplectuntur

utuo,

t

spirant

e

se mutuumervorem.

nless therwise

ndicated,

ll

translationsrefrom .

Grosseteste,

Hexameron

(On

the ix

Days

f

Creation),

rans. .

F.J.

Martin,

xford996.

24

Grosseteste,

e

Ventate137: Verumst

gitur,

icut estatur

ugustinus,uod

nulla

conspicitur

eritasisi

n

uce ummaeeritatis.


12/129

160

SIMON LIVER

as in the case of De Luce Grossetestes posingtheproblemofunity nd

multiplicity:

ow is the

unity

of the

supreme

truth elated to the

possi-

bility

f

genuinely

ther,

multiple

ruth?

n

order to answer this

ques-

tion,

Grosseteste irst

nquires

nto

the nature of truth.

Immediately,

rosseteste utlines

ruth s

inhering

n

the

eternal

peech

of God.

Rather than

being

a mere

adequation

of

speech

and

thing,

ruth

is found

fundamentally

nd

eternally

n

the

'interior'

peech

of

God,

namely

the emanation

of the Son from the

Father.25Not

only

is

the

speech

of the Father

adequated

in

the

highest

manner

to the

thing

of

which t speaks, t is thatvery adequationof itself o the thing t states.

This

speech

forms

he

exemplars'

of all

things

n

such

a

way

that the

conformity

f

things

o thiseternal

peaking

s

the

rightness

f them

and

the

obligation

o be what

they

re. 26For

Grosseteste,

ollowing

he tra-

dition of the

convertibility

f the

transcendentais,ruth,

oodness

and

being

are convertible

n

that

something

s true

n

so

far

as it is what it

should be

according

o its dea

in

the

divine mind which

emanatesfrom

the divine

being

n

the eternal

peech

of the Father.27

rosseteste

laims,

A treesa true reewhenthas he lenitudefbeingree nd acks he eficiencyofbeingree,ndwhat sthis lenitudefbeing xceptonformityo the eason

of

ree

n

the ternal ord?28

If

truth onsists

n

the

conformity

f each

thing

o its

reason or idea

in

the

eternal

Word,

this

mplies

hat

n

order to obtain

truth ne mustbe

able to observe both the created

object

and its

eternal

exemplar.

For

Grosseteste, herefore,

reated truth s

attainable

n

so far as the

light

of

eternal

reason

is

present

to the

person

observing.29

herefore,

reated

truth s attained

n

so far as the

light

lux)

of

the divine reason is

pre-

sent to the observer. ustas a bodycannot be seen to be coloured with-

25

Ibid.,

34.

Aquinas

as ater o

adopt

very

imilar

pproach

o truth. rosseteste

here

rioritises

interior'

peech

ver erbal

peech

ecause e

understandsrutho be

predicated

n a

hierarchy

f

manation

n

which

moremmanentmanation

mplies

more

eplete

nd

complete

ommunicationf

beine:.

26

Ibid.,

35:

Ipsa

uoque

onformitaserumd hanc

eternamictionemst arum

rectitudot debitumssendi

uod

unt.

27

bid.: Sed

nquantum

stresut

debet,

ntantumera

st.

gitur

eritaserumst

earum sse

rout

ebent

sse,

t earum ectitudot conformitas

erbo,

uo

aeternaliter

dicuntur.28 bid.: . tunc nim stvera rbor,umhabet lenitudinemsse rborisaretque

defectionesse

rboris,

t haec

plenitudo

ssendi

uid

st

nisi onformitasationirboris

in

Verbo eterno?

29

Ibid.,

37.


13/129

GROSSETESTEN

LIGHT,

RUTH ND

EXPERIMENTM

161

out thepresence

of

an

extrinsic

ight,

o too

something

annot

be known

within

ts created truth lone.

At this

point

n

his

treatise,

Grossetestemakes

a

subtle

lteration o a

basic simile

oncerning

nowledge

nd illumination

n

order

to show how

created truth

s not renderedredundant

by

divine

illumination,

ut is

instead

made

possible by

a

participation

n

eternaltruth.30

he familiar

simile ikens

he divine

ight

o the

light

of the sun

which makes created

objects

visible.

However,

he sun obliterates nd renders

nvisible ll other

sourcesof illumination.

rosseteste laims that

a more

appropriate

om-

parison mightbe drawn. The highest, ternaltruth s not to the other

created truths s the sun

is to other uminaries

n

the

sky.

Rather,

the

highest

ruth

s to created truth s the sun

is to colour. The sun illumi-

nates colour

which,

by

'participating'

n

this

light,

reveals the

body.

Importantly,

t

is not a

deficiency

f the

light

of the

sun which makes

colour

necessary

o the illumination f

a

body,

but a

hierarchy

f illu-

mination nsures hat created

bodies are drawn to reveal themselves:

he

sun draws the colour

to be colour and reveal itself

s

such,

while the

colour

n

turn,

because it

is

integral

o

the

being

of the

body

and not

a

mere secondary uality',reveals thatbody as, say, a strawberry. hile

it is true that no truth

s

perceived except

in

the

light

of the

supreme

truth,

evertheless reated

being participates

n

this truth nd therefore

is said to reveal

tself

n

a

secondary

but real sense.

This is reminiscent

of

a

particularly

eoplatonic

account of causation: the created

light

s

the

secondary

ut immediate cause' of created

truth,

while the

supreme

light

s the

primary

nd most

potent

cause' of

truth,

eing

and

good-

ness.31

Meanwhile,

a final addition to this simile of the

supreme

truth

and the sun

brings

urther

larity

o Grosseteste's otion

of truth.

ust

s

the weak eye is not able to see colourexcept n thelight f thesun,but

cannot

ook

directly pon

the

sun,

so the created mind

can

only

see

cre-

ated truth

n

the

light

of the

supreme

truth,

ut cannot look

direcdy

upon

the

light

of the

supreme

ruth. he

supreme

ruth

s

always

medi-

ated to created

being.

This familiar nd Platonic imile f the visionof the sun and the vision

of the

supreme

truth llows Grosseteste o make a brief

peculation

n

the

relationship

etween he

knowledge

nd truth ttainable

y

the

impure'

30

Ibid,

137-8.

31

ee

Aquinas,

uper

ibrume Causis

xpositionroposition

.


14/129

162

SIMON LIVER

and theknowledge nd truth ttainablebythe purein heart'.32 his dis-

tinction,

xpressed

here

in

termsof

the immundi

nd mundicordes

might

also

be the distinction

etween

pagan

philosophy

nd

the truthwhich

can be seen

in

the

ight

f Christian

evelation.

However,

t is

clear from

Grosseteste's

riting

hat

pagan learning by

which we

may

assume that

he is

thinking articularly

f

the

newly

circulated

writings

f Aristotle

upon

which

Grosseteste

will

ater

compose commentaries)

as

a

measure

of

truth,

lbeit

thoroughly

mediated

through

eflection

n

created

being,

that

s,

at one

remove from he

truly

eal.

And

yet,

of

course,

this

one

remove'is by no means off he mark: there s no one who knowsany

truth,

who

does

not

also know

n

some

manner,

knowingly

r

ignorandy,

the

supreme

ruth tself.33

he

pagan

learning

f the

philosophers

as its

own

value and

is,

in a

more

ndirect

ashion,

knowledge

f the

supreme

truth.

However,

there

s a

genuine

difference

etween the

illumination

attained

by

Christian

evelation nd that

attained

by

pagan

learning.

t

is a

difference hich is

in

turn based

upon

an

ontological

difference

between he

ight

f the

supreme

ruth

lux),

which

s

eternal,

nitary

nd

simple,

nd that

ight

reflected

n

creatures

lumen)

hich s

created,

mul-

tipleand therebyess certain.The lightof the supreme ruth s different

from he created

ight,

nd

yet

the latter s not

autonomous;

t is

depen-

dent

upon

the former.34

n

a similar

fashion,

or

Grosseteste,

t

appears

thatthe sciencesother han

Christian

heology

re

different

but not

under-

stood as autonomous

any

more than

created

being

s

autonomous rom he

supreme

truth,

r

lumen

rom ux.

A

crucial ssue

now arises which

relates o human

knowing.

o what

extent s

Grosseteste

dvocating

what was later

to be termed

ontologism',

namely,

he view

that the mind

directly

ntuits

nowledge

f

God

in

all

its acts of

knowledge,

efore

reaching

heaven? n otherwords, s human

knowledge

he resultof

a

direct

llumination f the human

intellective

soul

by

the

light

of the

divine?

f

this were the

case,

knowledge

would

be akin

to

God's

timeless

nowledge

ecause we would have a

vision of

the

eternal and

unchanging

divine

ideas themselves.

Or,

is

motion

an

integral art

of the attainment f truth or

Grosseteste,

n

which

we

come

32

Grosseteste,e Ventate138.This ssue eceivesreaterttentionnGrosseteste'sCommentaiiusn osteriorum

nalyticorum

ibros.or discussionf hismattern he

ommentary

see

McEvoy

982

n. 13),

23

and

332-4.

33

bid.

34

Thiswe earn rom rossetestehen e ikenshe

ependence

f reated

eing

n

God's ternal ord o

the

ependence

fwater n ts

ontainerorts

upport

nd

form.

De Ventate

141-2.


15/129

GROSSETESTEN

LIGHT,

RUTH ND

EXPERIMENTM

163

to

knowledge

n

mediated formthrough ime?

In

what follows, will

argue

that Grosseteste oes not rule

out intuited

nowledge

f God even

within he

temporal

ife,

yet

he

acknowledges

hat,

because of our weak-

ened

post-lapsarian

tate,

we

require

motion

and time

n

order to come

to

truth,

nd this necessitates

he observation f

corporeal being

which

eventually uggests

he

importance

of the

repeated

observations f an

experimentm

Illuminationthe

enses nd theMotion

f

Knowing

In

his discussion f

Grosseteste

s

understanding

f

truth,

ames

McEvoy

is

anxious to exoneratehis

subject

of the

charge

of

ontologism

ecause

this

theory

f illumination enders he

difference etweenthe

knowledge

attained

by

the blessed and the

knowledge

ttained

by

the viatoresa

mat-

ter

merely

f

degree'.35

With

reference o the

Commentary

n theCelestial

HierarchyMcEvoy

outlinesGrosseteste's

elief hat the direct ntuition f

God

in

this

ife

has

been attained

by only

a

very

few

privilegedmystics

(for

xample,

Moses and St.

Paul36)

who

may

then be referred o as

the

mundicordesr perfecteurgati.his is a momentarynd anticipatoryhar-

ing

n

the beatific ision.

By

contrast,

nowledge

hatwe

ordinarily

ttain,

whether f

God

or

creatures,

s of a different

rder.Thus the attainment

of truth s

understood s

a

hierarchy

xtending

rom he weakness f

pre-

scientific

pinion

to

the direct vision of

God. How

might

we

identify

more

precisely

he difference etween

knowledge

ttained

through

he

mediation f created

ight

nd

the

knowledge

f the

blessed

n

the

direct

vision of God?

To answer this

question,

t

is

necessary

irst

o consider

Grosseteste's

nderstanding

f

universais efore

progressing

o the

mpor-

tance of sensation nd their inkwith the hierarchy f the elements.

In

his

commentary

n Aristotle's osterior

nalytics

Grosseteste

makes

a

distinctionetweenfour

kinds f universal.37

he first indare the

deas

35

McEvoy

982

n.

13),

26.

For

McEvoy's

ull

iscussionf

Grossetestend he

harge

of

ontologism,

ee

324

ff.While

oncurring

ithmuch f

McEvoy's

iscussion,

twill

e

evident

rom hat ollowshat

avoid is

description

fGrosseteste's

heory

s dualistic'

(328).

t

seems hat hewhole

hrust

f

Grosseteste'se

Ventates towardshe

elineation

of

n

accountf

ruth hich

ecognisesultiplicity

nd

differenceithout

uxtaposing

his

withhe implicityf he ivineux nany roto-modern,ualisticashion.36See,for xample,rosseteste,exameron1.6.1.

37

Grosseteste,

ommentariusn

Posteriorum

nalyticorum

ibros

1.7,

96

ff.,

d. P.

Rossi,

Firenze

981,

39-41.

ereafter,

hisworks

cited s

Grosseteste,

ommentarius. See

also

P.

Duhem,

e

Systme

uMonde:

istoiresedoctrines

osmologiques

ePlaton

Copernic

vol.

V,

Paris

958,

45-51;

cEvoy

982

n. 13),

27-9;

.

Marrone,

illiam

f

uvergne

nd obert

Grosseteste:

ew

deas

f

Truthn

he

arly

hirteenth

entury

Princeton

983,

67-71.


16/129

1

4

SIMON LIVER

in

the mind of God

which are

contemplated

n

the

supreme ight byintellects

eparated

from

phantasms.

These are the

principles

f knowl-

edge

and

being.

The second

kind of universal

esides

n

the

angelic

ntel-

ligentia

r luxcreata

hose

knowledge

f all

subsequent

reatures s

derived

from

a

prior

and direct

contemplation

f

the divine

ideas. These uni-

versais

xistwithin he

thought

f the

ntelligentia^

lluminationf

the human

mind,

which is not able

to

contemplate

mmediately

he

supreme ight,

comes from

the

light

of this

intelligentia.

he third

variety

f

universal

resides

n

the

celestialbodies.

A

mind

which

s

not

capable

of the

con-

templation f the supreme ightor the angelic lux creatamayfind n the

light

of

the celestialbodies

the

principles

f the

sublunary

ealm

which

is

subject

to motion.

The fourth

ariety

f universal

s to

be found

n

form

which,

n

its

turn,

s

able to

illuminate

he material

n

which

it

resides and with

which it

constitutes

composite.

t is

here that

one

might

ind he

mmediate ormal

ause of

things

nd their

universal

rin-

ciples. Finally,

n

addition

to the four

varieties f

universal,

Grosseteste

comments

n the

very

owest

form f

knowledge'

more

properly

ermed

'opinion')

attainable

y

the intellectus

ebilis. he

'knowledge'

ttained

here

does not concentrate pon universais t all, but is arrived t through he

observationof accidents.38

he

link

between

knowledge

and

being

is

undone

in

such

a

way

that

the

principles

f this

knowledge'

re

merely

the

accidents f

things

nd

not their

ssence

principiassendi).

uch 'knowl-

edge'

is

thereby

wholly

uncertain

nd

might

be more

properly

ermed

'opinion'.

Throughout

his

hierarchy

f

universais,

he latter

re

dependent

on

the

former,

nd each mediates

ight

o

the lower evels

of created

being.

This is a

hierarchy

f

knowledge

ttainable

by

human

beings

which is

also a hierarchy fbeing. In extendingGrossetestes immediatedescrip-

tive terms

we

might

lso

understand his

n

terms

f

a

hierarchy

f the

'motion' or

'change'

that s

involved

n

the

attainment f truth.

At the

highest

evel of

contemplation

which s

the beatific ision

and the

high-

est evel of

knowledge

we find he

universais

n

the

actuality

f the

eter-

nal

emanation f the

Word of God.

The

contemplation

f

theseuniversais

or divine

deas',

whichthe blessed

hare with he

angelic ntelligentia

takes

the

form f immediate ntuition. his

might

ven

be understood s akin

to Aristotelian

nergei.

his

knowledge

s

fully

ctual

and

'all

at

once',

being repleteand contained within ts own limitsfor it seeks

nothing

38

Grosseteste,

ommentarius

1.7,

141

ff.


17/129

GROSSETESTEN

LIGHT,

RUTH ND

EXPERIMENTM 165

beyond tself.39he principles f thisknowledge re 'the uncreatedrea-

sons of

things'40

nd the

pure

and intuitive

ntellect an

grasp

these with

complete ertainty

ithout

he mediation f time. The next evel of

con-

templation

s

through

rather

han

with)

the

angelic intelligentia.

his lux

creatas a reflection f

the

supreme ight

of the divine

mind,

yet

t con-

tains

within tself he first ntimations f motion

proper,

for this knowl-

edge

is

not

necessary

nd has

proceeded

nto

being.

Moreover,

we learn

from e Luce hat he

ntelligentia

which s the first eflection

f the

supreme

light,

s the

incorporeal

movingpower

which moves

the celestial

pheres

with diurnalmotion.41 o at the next evel of the universalwe find he

celestial

pheres

which contain within

hemselves he

light

or

principles

of

everything

hat

occurs below within he cosmic

hierarchy.

hese bod-

ies

possess

a

diurnalrotationwhich s a

motionmost akin to

the created

actuality

f the

angelic intelligentia

nd the

truthof the

supreme ight.

Why?

Because this diurnal rotation an be

regarded

as the most com-

plete

and self-containedocal motion

for,

nlikerectilinear

motion,

t

does

not seek an end

outside ts own

self-delineatedimits.

Finally,

he uni-

versaisof the celestial

phere mpart

motion to the

lowest evel of uni-

versal,namelythe forms f createdbeings.This finalmotionmay be

rectilinear o

a

greater

or lesser

extent

depending

on a

created

being's

particular

usceptibility

o condensation nd

rarefaction.42

In

addition o this

hierarchy

f universais

nd

motion,

here s

also

an

important ierarchy

f

the elements nd the

senses. The cosmic hierar-

chy

of elements

egins

at its

height

with

the

serenity

f the

heavens and

the

ight

f the cfire' f the celestial

bodies,

and descends

through

he air

to water and earth.43

oupled

to the elements s

the

hierarchy

f sense.

39

At

Metaphysics

X. -6

ff.,

ristotleraws

distinctionetween

nergeia

actuality

r

operation,

hich

s not rientatedo an

extrinsic

elos)

nd kinesis

motion,

hich as a

telosutside

tself).

or

etailediscussionsf his

istinction

ee,

or

xample,

.

L.

Ackrill,

Aristotle's

istinctionetween

nergeia

nd

Kinesis,

n: R.

Bamborough

ed.),

New

ssays

n

Plato

nd

ristotle,

ondon

965,

21-41;

.

Menn,

he

riginf

ristotle's

oncept

f

nergeia:

Energeia

nd

unamis,

n:

Ancient

hilosophy,

4

1994),

3-114;

.

Graham,

he

evelopment

of

Aristotle's

onceptf

Actuality:

ommentsn

Reconstruction

y tephen

ennin: Ancient

Philosophy,

5

1995),

51-64;

nd G. A.

Blair,

Unfortunately,

t

Is

a

BitMore

omplex:

Reflections

n

Energeia,

n:

Ancient

hilosophy,

5

1995),

65-80.

40

Grosseteste,ommentarius,.7,102-3.41

Grosseteste,

e Luce57:

Quapropter

irtus

ncorporalisntelligentiae

el

animae,

quae

movet

phaeram

rimam

t

upremam

otu

iurno,

ovet

mnes

phaeras

aelestes

inferioresodem iurno

otu.

42

ee

bid.,

7-8.

43

Grosseteste,

excmeronVI.1.1-3.


18/129

166 SIMON LIVER

Grosseteste uotes Augustine o the effect hatin sensationwe do not

find

simply

he action

of an

object

on the

passive

senses of

a

subject.

The encounter etween sentient reature nd the creaturewhich s

per-

ceived is one

in

which

the

action

of one

upon

the other s

reciprocal.

The sensitive

oul,

we are

told,

actsn

the

yes hrough

he

ure hining

ire whentsheat s

suppressed

ndmade

into ts

pure ight.

ut

n

hearing

he ire

enetratesy

tsheat

nto hemore

iq-

uidair.

n

smell he

pure

ir

comes

hrough

nd reacheshemoist xhalation

In

tastet comes

hrough

ndreacheshemoisturehats more

odily:

nd t

goes

into his

nd

hrough

his

hentreachesheheavinessf

he

arth,

nd

makeshe

last ense,hat f ouch. 44

Whereas this

passage puts

forward

he notion

that the sensitive oul acts

through

he senses on the bodies

sensed,

elsewhere

Grosseteste udines

what was later to be

known as

the doctrine

of

'the

multiplication

f

species': verything

n

the

sublunary

orld cts on its

surroundingshrough

an emanationof

a

likeness

f itself.45

rosseteste tates

hat

A

natural

gentmultiplies

ts

power

romtselfo

the

ecipient,

hethert acts

n

sense

r matter But he ffects

re

diversified

y

the

diversity

fthe

ecipient.

Forwhents owers receivedy he enses,tproducesneffecthatssomehow

spiritual

nd

noble;

y

ontrast,

hent s received

y

matter,

t

produces

mate-

rial ffect.46

44

Ibid.,

I.

1.3,

uoting

ugustine,

e Genesid itteram

III.5-6:

Agit

nim nima en-

tiens

n

oculis

er gnum

ucidum

represso

alore ius

usque

d

lucem ius

puram.

n

audito ero

sque

d

liquidiorem

erem,

alore

gnis ntrt.

n

olfactuutem ransit

aerem

urum

t

pervenitsque

d humidamxalacionem..

In

gustu

utem t

hanc

transitt

pervenit

sque

d humorem

orpulentiorem;uo

eciam

enetratotque

ran-

siecto,

um d terram

ravitatemervenit,angendi

ltimumensum

git.'

More

ar-ticularly,rossetesteeld o he xtramissionheoryf isionropoundedy lato, ristode,

Ptolemy

ndEuclid. n this

iew,

he ctofvisionncludes

ays

ouring

orth

rom

he

eye.

ee

Grosseteste,

ommentarius

II.4,

464

ff.;

e ride

72-3,

ited

n

Crombie953

n. ),

118.As

Crombie

tates,

he hirteenth

entury

aw onsiderable

ebatebout

whetherhe

multiplication

f

ight

s

a realmovement

n

space

r

merely

heresult

f

perception.

Roger

acon

c.

1220-c.

292)

ppears

o

opt

for

he

former

xplanation,

dding

hat

light asses

n an

imperceptible

ime,

nd thereforeith

motion e cannot

erceive

[The

pus ajus

fRoger

aconed. and rans. obert elle

urke,

hiladelphia

928,

art

V,

distinction

,

chapter

,

488

ff.).

45

On this

octrine,

hich eceived ore

omprehensive

nunciation

n

the

work f

Roger

acon,

ee

Lindberg

983

n. 3).

Lindberg

emarks

hat his octrineas ts ri-

ginsnthework fArabichilosophy,nparticularl-KindrIii).46

Grosseteste,

e

lineis,

ngulis,

t

igures

60;

citedn

Lindberg

983

n. 3),

ii:

Agens

naturale

ultiplicat

irtutem

uam se

usque

n

patiens,

ive

gat

n

ensum,

ive

n

mate-

riam Sed

propter

iversitatem

atientis

iversificanturffectus.

n

sensu nimsta

ir-

tus

ecepta

acit

perationem

piritulemuodammodo

t

nobiliorem;

n

contrario,

ive

n

materia,

acit

perationem

aterialem

..


19/129

GROSSETESTEN

LIGHT,

RUTH ND

EXPERIMENTM

167

Within his

xchange

between

entient

reature nd

that

which s

sensed,one finds

fidelity

o the

principle

hat like knows ike5:

ightperceives

'fire' or the rarefied umen

hearing perceives

the

relatively

arefied

ir,

smell

perceives

he thicker

ir,

taste

perceives

iquid

or

water,

nd

touch

perceives

arth.

However,

s

we

might xpect,

ll

sensation s linked na-

logically

o

light,

or

light

s the nstrumentf

the soul

in

sensing hrough

the senses of the

body.'47

Again, Augustine

s

quoted

to the

effect

hat

light

s that

by

which the soul acts

in all

the senses. Thus sensation s

integrated

nto a

general ight

metaphysics,

or

ust

as

each

of

the ele-

ments s a more or less dense form f light, o too the sensitive ouls of

animals

n

their

ctivity

f

sensing

use

a

formof

light

which is akin to

the elementwhich is

being

sensed.

Both the sentient reature nd that

which

s

perceivedby

the senses are constitutednd related

n

the activ-

ity

of

light.

Moreover,

hisemanationof

species

from

ll

things,

n

being

a formof

light,

cts

in

accordance with the

principles

f

geometrical

mathematics. hus Grosse este an claim that all causes of natural ffects

can

be discovered

by

lines,

angles

and

figures.48

However,

t

is

important

o note

that,

ust

as the lower universais re

analogously elatedto thehigherby participation,o too are the senses.

For

Grosseteste,

he lowest sense is that

of touch because this

is

con-

cerned with nert arth

which,

amongst

he

elements,

s the most dense

and least actual form f

light.

The sense

of touch

is

analogously

elated

to

taste,

hen

smell,

hearing

nd

finally ight.

Yet

sight

tself,

he

highest

of

the

bodily

enses,

s

analogously

elated o the visionof the nnermind

possessed

by

those who

contemplate

he

angelic

lux creata nd the divine

light

tself.At

the

highest

evel of

knowledge

nd

'sight'

n

the beatific

vision,

we 'see' the

ight

f the

supreme

ruthwith he

purified

nd unen-

cumberedeye of the mind. This vision of God is the culmination y

grace

of the restoration f

humanity

n

the

image

and likeness f God.49

Because this

knowledge

s

fully eplete,

ctual and

unmediated,

t

involves

no motion or

temporality.

his beatific ision s an

activity

f the soul

which no

longer requires

he

mediations f

bodily

sensation.

A link

is established

between,

on

the one

hand,

the universais nd

motion, and,

on the other

hand,

the elements

and the senses. Before

coming

to

a

conclusion

bout how we

might

draw a

distinction etween

47

Grosseteste,

exameronII.

10.1.

48

ee n. 9 above.

49

ee

McEvoy

982

n. 13),

4 n. 73.


20/129

1

8

SIMON LIVER

knowledge ttainedthrough he mediationof createdlightand knowl-

edge

in

the

beatific

ision,

t is

first

ecessary

o

clarify

riefly

ne

more

connection

between

motion and

the

particular

knowledge

chieved

by

corporeal

ensation.

nitially,

ne can

note

that sensation

s the

result f

the motion

of the

species

or

likeness f a

creature o

reside

n

the sen-

sitive oul

of

an

animal.

Sensation

s, therefore,

lready

kind

of

abstrac-

tion,

because the

outward

sense is

a

power

of

receiving

nd

grasping

sensible

pecies

without

matter. 50he

various

pecies

which

rrive

n

the

sense

organs

are then

collated

n

the

common sense'

(

ensus

ommunis)

o

form lessfragmentednd more ntegratedense mpression. romhere,

the

united

likenesses' f the

perceived

object

are

passed

into

the mem-

ory.

Properly

peaking,

t

is

the

magination

hich

retains he

forms

which

have been

sensed,

whilethe

memory

roper

ncludes he

estimative

ower

of

udging

the forms

eceived.

The motions

rom he

senses to

the mem-

ory

are

shared

by

all

rational

animals.

The final

motion

nvolves

the

excitement f

reason

by many

memories hat

are

held

in

the soul.

These

motions

nvolved

n

sensing

re

described

n

the

final

hapter

f

Grosseteste's

commentary

n

the Aristotle's

osterior

nalytics

In

those hohave

his ense s well

s

retention,

heres a

gathering

f

onemem-

ory

rom

any

ensationsnd

hiss common

o brute

nimalsnd

rational

eings;

but

n

rational

eings

t

s

already

he

ase hat rom

any

memories,

nce eason

is

excited,

n

experience

s

formed;

his

s not he ase

with

on-rational

nimals.

Therefore,

rom

ense

omes

memory,

rom

he

repetition

f

many

memoriesn

experimentm

ndfrom

he

xperimentm

he niversal

hichs

apart

romhe

articu-

lars,

et

ot

eparate

romhe

articulars

ut

he ame

s

them,

amely

s the

rin-

ciple

f

both rt nd

cience.51

This whole

systematic

rocedure

of

sensation,

which s

already

form

f

abstraction adepossible ytheemanation fspeciesdue to thedynamism

of

light

which

constitutes he

more or less

rarefied

ensible

elements f

fire,

ir,

water

nd

earth,

was

to

yield

universal

rinciples

f

nature,

what

Grosseteste alled universalia

omplexa

xperimentalia.

'complex

experimental

universais'.

50

Grosseteste,

exameron

VII. 4.1: Est

utem xterior

is

usceptiva

t

apprehensiva

sensibilium

pecierum

inemateria.

51

Grosseteste,ommentariusII. ,33-40: Inquibusutemst ensusum acretentiva,est olligerexmultisensibusnammemoriam,t hoccommunestbrutisum atio-

nalibus;

ed

n

rationalibusam

ontingit

x

multis emoriisxcitata

ationeieri

xperi-

entiam;

n

brutisero

on sthoc.

Ex

sensu

gitur

it

memoria,

x memoria

ultiplicata

experimentm,

x

experimento

niversale,

uod

st

preterarticularia,

on arnen

epa-

ratum

particularibus,

ed st dem

llis, rtis,

cilicet,

t

seiende

rincipium.


21/129

GROSSETESTEN

LIGHT,

RUTH

ND

EXPERIMENTM 169

The hierarchies

f

universais,

lements nd

sensations

n

which the

higher

mediate

ight

o the lower also

feature ver

more

perfect

motions

as

one ascends

towards he

supreme ight

which s

the source

of

all

good-

ness,

being,

ruth nd

knowledge.

he

distinction etween

he

knowledge

attained

n

the

mediationof the

created

light

and that

attained

n

the

beatific

ision

might

herefore e made

in

termsof

motion. The

latter

features n

immediate and

intuitive

rasp

of truth

which

requires

no

movement r

change.

As

was

claimed

above,

we

might

even

consider

this

akin

to

Aristotelian

nergeia

for this

knowledge

s

replete

and not

mediatedby time. Yet as a resultof the Fall, we do not share in the

beatific

ision.The sin which

results rom

he

Fall

is

understood

s

a dis-

ordereddesire

n

which the human

soul seeks

first fter

orporealthings

rather

han the

higher

ight

f God himself.

rosseteste

rgues

that

f

the

intelligence

ere not

weighed

down

by

the

body

it would

receive com-

plete

irradiation,

nd

therefore

nowledge

nd

fully

ctual

being,

from

the

supreme

ight.

Because this

purity

s

obscured

by

corrupt

esires,

all

the

owers

f his ationaloul

orn

n

man re aid

hold f

by

hemass f

he

body

nd

annotct nd o in a

way

re

sleep.

ccordingly,

henn he

rocessf

timehe ensesctthrough anynteractionsf ensewith ensiblehings,he ea-

soning

s awakenednd

mixed ith hese

ery

ensible

hings

nd s takenn

the

senseso sensible

hings

s

in

a

ship.52

Therefore,

n a

fashion

trikingly

eminiscent f the

Platonic

doctrine f

recollection,

rosseteste

tates that our

souls

require

awakening

by

the

repeated

motions'

n

time of our

corporeal

senses. Within

this

context,

the order of

being

and

intelligibility

s

the reverse

f

our

rder of

know-

ing,

for fallen

humanity

must

begin

with

knowledge

f the less

intelligi-

ble

created and

corporeal

being by

means of

the motions

of

sensation

before chieving he visionof thesupremelyntelligibleight fthe divine

ideas.53Thus the

lower one

descends

towards

corporeal

sensation,

he

greater

he

temporality

r motion

nvolved

n

knowing.

s

there, hen,

dualism

between

the

knowledge

ttained

n

the

beatific

ision and that

attained

by

fallen

humanity? ust

s

there s no

dualism

between

Platonic

being

and

becoming

and Aristotelian

nergeia

nd kinesis

so too

there s

52

Ibid., .14, 35-41,my mphasis),uotednCrombie953n. 3),73: . omnesvirespsiusnimeationalisnhomineato ccupateunt ermolem

orporis,

e

possint

agere,

t ta

quodammodo

opite.

um

taque rocessu

emporisgant

ensus

er

multi-

plicem

bviationem

ensus

um

ensibilibus,

xpergiscitur

atio

psis

ensibusdmixtat

in

sensibus

uasi

n

navi

elata d

sensibilia.

53

Ibid., .17,

40-65.


22/129

170

SIMON LIVER

no dualism between

Grosseteste's eatific ision and the

knowledge

hat

is attainable n this

ife,

because amidst all these distinctionshe former

participate

n

the latter.

n

the case of

Grosseteste,

ll levels of knowl-

edge

are

analogically

elated

n

light.

et distinctionsan be made between

the differentciences

whichdeliver ifferentinds f

knowledge,

nd these

distinctions

ay

be delineate

Documents

Vivarium - Vol Xlii, No 2, 2004